Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP December 27, 1979 ~ o¡ ANDOVER SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL r1EETING - DECEMBER 27, 1979 HINUTES A Special Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on December 27, 1979, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Peach Councilmen absent: None Also present: City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist Agenda Approval Council agreed that the discussion on the Liquor Committee report will be put on the Agenda for the first Council meeting in February, 1980. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve the Agenda with the addition of Item 10, Council Operations. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution for "201 Study Grant" Council discussion was comparing the Resolution prepared by the City Clerk to that which was recommended by the Waste Water Control Commission. It was agreed to adopt that Resolution prepared by the Clerk with two changes, noting that it is the intent to apply for grant funds for Step 1 of the program. The City has the option of not participating in the remaining steps of the study. It was also generally felt that the situation would have to be reviewed again in the event the City would not be receiving grant funds. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, adopting a Resolution prepared by the City Clerk, leaving in tact the first, second and third paragraphs, beginning with the fourth paragraph: NOW THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover to hereby authorized Tolz, King, Duvall, Anderson, and Associates to assist the preparation of the necessary studies of on-site waste water treatment systems under the Step 1 project; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council, City of Andover, to hereby authorize such expenditure of up to $15,000 for such studies subject to availability of grant funds from State and Federal Agencies up to $13,500; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council, City of Andover, to hereby finance up to $1,500 of the above total cost from General Funds; rest of Resolution as written. (See Resolution R101-9) VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Windschitl; NO-Peach Motion carried. Clarification of Sewer Rate Change Discussion was on clarification of the Motion made on December 18, 1979, by Councilman Jacobson as to whether the intent is to have the sewer rate increase be effective for the January 1, 1980, billing, which is for usage in the months of October, November, and December, 1979; or whether the intent is to be effective for usage on January 1, 1980, which would first be billed in April, 1980. MOTION by Orttel, that in order to clarify the increase in sewer usage fees, that the lncrease will take effect with the January 1, 1980, billing. ~10tion dies for lack of a second. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, a clarification of the City Council discussion on Sewer Usage Fees during the City Council meeting of December 18 to make the ~lotion read that the increase of sewer rates to $6, such increase will be for the total billing which goes out in the month of January, 1980, and thereafter. VOTE ON r~OTI ON: YES-Jacobson, Orttel; NO-Lachinski, Peach, Windschitl Motion failed. Special City Council Meeting December 27, 1979 - Minutes Page 2 (Clarification of Sewer Rate Change, Continued) Councilman Peach did not want to bill people retroactively. The Clerk testified that with the sewer rate increase to $6 becomming effective in January and billed in April, there still would be monies in the sewer fund budget to meet expenses for 1980. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, that the Motion made at the last meeting be effective at the April, 1980, billing. Motion carried unanimously. Mileage Reimbursement Rate Change Councilman Orttel explained that the Personnel Committee is recommending a mileage rate increase to 20 cents per mile, which appears to be an average of the rates used by other municipalities and businesses. It is also anticipated that the City would not act again on mileage rates for at least another year. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, to adjust mileage rates to 20 cents per mile effective January 1. Discussion: Mayor Windschitl asked if we want to have the employees ending up reporting the additional 1\ cents for income tax purposes, as the government is allowing only 18\ cents a mile. Other Councilmen felt that it is the employee's responsibility, that there are instructions on tax forms pertaining to this, and that if it is proved that it costs that much to operate a car, it is not taxable income. It was also generally felt that 20 cents per mile for personal use of a car is not out of line at this time. Motion carried unanimously. Administrative Policy Because of the question of the legality of the policy as written with regard to Leaves because of a birth of a child, Councilman Jacobson recommended the following changes: Eliminate Section III, D under Paid Leaves of Absence. Because it is to be treated as other sick leaves, the following wording would be inserted under SICK LEAVE, III, Provisions: Employee taking sick leave for the birth of a child shall be pald up to the llmlt of sick leave benefits accrued. Any time off over the limits of accrued sick leave shall be without pay. The employee's position shall be held open for a minimum of time as represented in a medical doctor's report. The length of the employee's illness due to childbirth is when the employee is found unfit for medical reasons to adequately perform the employee's jOb responsibility. Discussion was that the policy should not pertain to absences due to the birth of a child only, but to all illnesses. It was then agreed to DELETE Section D under Provisions of SICK LEAVE, and to add the paragraph suggested by Councilman Jacobson on sick leave for the blrth of a child as the new Section D, but to change the wording to include other illnesses as well. SICK LEAVE, Provisions, A: Discussion was on the suggestion of reducing the number of slck days allowed per year to what industry generally pays, 6 or 7 days a year, and providing some type of long-term disability insurance; on the pros and cons of long- term disability plans; and on the possibility of allowing an employee to borrow sick days from future earned days in the event of extended illness. It was generally agreed to refer the section on Sick Leave back to the Personnel Committee to investigate the feasibility of a long-term disability program, what it would cost on a group basis, etc. LEAVE OF ABSENCE, I, Policy: Delete "and temporary". LEAVE OF ABSENCE, III, Paid Leaves of Absence: Questioned how "critical illness" would be deflned and who would determlne It; also questioned the need for provision E. Councilman Orttel explained that the intent of provision E is that an employee cannot request a leave of absence with pay to extend his vacation or a holiday. Special City Council Meeting December 27, 1979 - Minutes Page 3 (Administrative Policy, Continued) Provision A: Council agreed to delete "or critical illness" on the second line, and to delete "such as" on the third line. Provision B: For clarification, Council agreed to reword to: The time allowed with pay for the above will be a reasonable amount... Provision C: Acceptable as written. Provision D; Delete entirely. Provision E: Delete entirely. Provision F: To be relettered to become provision D. Leave of Absence, IV, Unpaid Leaves of Abence, Provision B: Delete entirely. CONFLICT OF INTEREST, II, PROVISIONS, provision A: Discussion was on requiring an employee to make prompt and full disclosure and to review with his supervisor or other appropriate City official. Councilman Lachinski's preference was that this be done through the supervisor. Mayor Windschitl also felt that the present City policy of requiring employees to inform the City of any outside activities should be included in this policy. Council debated the desirability of the present policy versus its legality, as Councilman Orttel questioned the City's right to inquire about what an employee does outside of the City unless there is a conflict. Councilmen Jacobson, Orttel, and Peath felt that the policy as written and presented by the Personnel Committee was acceptable. JURY DUTY: Acceptable as written. TUITION AID, II, PROVISIONS, provision B, 2: Question was raised as to how the determlnatlon tor an employee considered to have long-range potential with the City is determined and who is going to make that determination. Councilman Orttel noted that provision B, 3 states that the decision will be made by the supervisor and City Council. Also, correct spelling: commencing. II, PROVISIONS, A, Seminars: The Clerk explained the problem with the policy as wrltten lS determining a budget amount for seminars. Employees also receive short notice on seminars and often times do not have time to receive Council approval. She had written up a policy on this but it has never been adopted by the Council. She would prefer to see a policy that spells out what every employee is entitled to so they know it ahead of time. Council agreed to DELETE this provision A on Seminars and that the Personnel Committee will review this item further. HOLIDAYSJ II, HOLIDAYS; Council discussed the number of days proposed (10). The Clerk explaine that one of the problems is when Christmas and New Years fall midweek, many businesses are closed the day before. There was virtually no activity this last Monday, Christmas Eve, especially in the afternoon. Council agreed to reduce the holidays allowed to nine, to eliminate Columbus Day as a holiday with the office being open that day, but that time would then be allowed as a floating holiday. At the beginning of the year, the Acting Administrator will designate the day or one- half days for this holiday. The City office would then be closed on the floating holiday. III, ELIGIBILITY, provision B: Council agreed to DELETE this section and not provide hollday beneflts for temporary employees. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: Acceptable as written. DEFINITIONS: Permanent Employees: Council agreed that because of the nature of the Recording Secretaries' positions, that those two positions (for Council and Planning Special City Council Meeting December 27, 1979 - Minutes Page 4 (Administrative Policy, Continued) and Zoning Commission) would be exempted from this Administrative Policy. Council agreed to ADD the following sentence to the end of the Permanent Employee definition: This definition shall not apply to the Recording Secretaries to the City Council and Commissions. It was generally expected that these policies would be reviewed and updated periodically by the Council. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that the City Council adopt the Administrative Pollcles Numbers 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 as amended and that these policies supersede existing City policies that cover these same areas. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Peach; NO-Windschitl Motion carried. Mayor Windschitl: I feel that the prior Conflict of Interest section that was written years ago should have been included in this one. Recess at 9:22; reconvene at 9:31 p.m. 1980 Salaries Councilman Orttel explained that the salary increase for employees as recommended by the Personnel Committee includes any merit and cost of living increase as of January 1, and that raises in the following years would be increasedcaccording to the index as noted. They have established a salary range for each position based on research conducted of similiar positions in neighboring communities and some private businesses and using the 1979 Stanton Averages. It is intended that salary increases would be determined in September of each year to be effective January 1 of the following year, which will allow the employee to know in advance what his next year's salary will be. Council debated tying salary increases to the US Government's Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index (CPI) as recommended by the Personnel Committee. Councilman Lachinski and Mayor Windschitl were opposed to indexing the salary ranges to 75 percent of the CPI and were opposed to automatic cost of living pay raises. Councilman Peach stated he would agree to lowering it to about 50 percent of the CPI but still felt leary of absolutely tying increases to the CPl. Discussion continued on methods of determining salary increases every year; suggesting merit increases be recommended by the Acting Administrator and that performance evaluation be done on every employee for documentation; that the Council should make the determination every year of what percent will be given across the board for cost of living purposes; suggesting the Council review what neighboring cities have done and base a decision on that; and suggesting that when raising the salary ranges and the employee's salary, that the percent of increase agreed upon be applied to the mean of the salary range to determine what amount the range would be increased and also to determine the amount of salary increase for the employee. It was generally felt that establishing a salary range for each position was a good idea and that the salaries suggested for those ranges were reasonable. It was agreed that the method of indexing salary ranges and increases would be referred back to the Personnel Committee. Discussion was then on the Personnel Committee's recommended salary increase for City Staff for 1980. Councilman Orttel stated the proposed salaries were arrived at by using Stanton Averages and comparing both private and municipal competition, lookîng at where the employee is within the suggested salary ranges, and attempting to raise the salary to what is being paid by the competition for the same position. Special City Council Meeting December 27, 1979 - Minutes Page 5 (1980 Salaries, Continued) MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, that the salary schedule as proposed by the Personnel Committee be adopted effective January 1, 1980, for Pat Lindquist (7 percent increase to $18,725 per year plus $150 per month for administrator duties), Dave Almgren (4 percent increase to $18,400 per year), Ray Sowada (5 percent increase to $17,700 per year), Frenchie (Frank Stone,S percent increase to $17,500 per year), Rae Ellen Bakke (5 percent increase to $11,030 per year), Janet Evelund (5 percent increase to $11,620 per year) and Vicky Volk (8 percent increase to $9,660 per year). Discussion: It is the intent that by September, 1980, the employees will be reviewed as to where they are within the salary range as well as to the status of the salary range itself. It is also the intent that no further salary increase would be made prior to January, 1981. Reiterated the need for the Personnel Committee to review indexing salary increases and salary range adjustments, and that some provision should also be made for merit increases as well. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, that Marcie's (Peach) salary be increased to $52 a meeting and $13 for each hour in addition to the regular hours, and that Mary Kiley's be increased to $42 a meeting with the additional hours to be paid for at the rate of $8.50 an hour. Discussion: Councilman Orttel explained that it amounts to a 4 percent increase for Ms. Peach and a 5 percent increase for Ms. Kiley. During further discussion it was questioned whether the P & Z's Recording Secretary's position is comparable to that of the Council and whether the present salary for it isn't sufficient. No recommendation for salary was made for the P & Z Recording Secretary position. Discussion was also on the Minutes prepared on the City Council meetings relative to the detail, noting that detailed Minutes can be a disadvantage to the City from a legal standpoint, but that it is useful to have more complete Minutes of the meetings for reference. Council generally agreed that it is desirable to have more complete Minutes of the meetings. Councilmen Jacobson and Orttel withdrew the Second and the Motion. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, recommend that the salary of Marcie Peach be lncreased to $52 and $13 an hour after 11 p.m. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Windschitl; ABSTAIN-Peach Motion carried. Approval of Minutes November 15, 1979, Special Meeting: Correct as written November 20, 1979: Page 3, 2/3 way down, under MOTION by Jacobson, 4th line from bottom: variances (sp) Page 2, 4 lines from bottom, change zoning classification to: Limited Business Page 3, second paragraph, third line, change zoning classification to: Limited Business December 4, 1979: Correct as written MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, to approve the Council Minutes for November 15 and November 20, 1979, as corrected. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, to approve the Minutes of December 4 as written. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Peach; PRESENT-Windschitl Motion carried. Special City Council Meeting December 27, '1979 - Minutes Page 6 Approval of Claims MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, that Checks 2891 through 2900 totaling $9,133.42 and Check Number 343 totaling $17,086.22 be approved. Motion carried unanimously. Council Operations Council discussion was on ways of increasing Council efficiency at meetings hoping to decrease the length of the meetings, to require less time of the professional counsel, and to allow committee business to be taken up at an earlier hour. Suggestions discussed were holding a third meeting a month to deal only with those items that would require the attendance of the lawyer and engineer, or holding a third meeting every month where professional help would not be required to be in attendance. Because of the inactivity of some of the Committees, it was suggested that the Council have one meeting a month as a meeting of the Committee as a Whole and schedule one or two items for discussion at that meeting. The citizens on the Committees would function in an advisory capacity and would be invited to attend that meeting. Having that meeting on the Thursday night of the same week as one of the regular Council meetings was suggested. Council debated scheduling a third meeting a month with some expressing fear that it would lead to needing to have four meetings a month. It was also noted that the agenda for the City of Coon Rapids lists the controversial items separately from the non-controversial items. For those non-controversial items, motions are made and voted on with little or no discussion. With the intent of expediting agenda items more efficiently, the Council agreed to the following: 1) Beginning with the second meeting in January, no item on the Agenda will be discussed unless the Council has received the written material prior to that day's meeting unless in the opinion of the Mayor it is of critical importance it has to be acted upon that night. The Clerk was directed to advise committees, professional advisors, etc., of this decision. 2) Beginning with the second meeting in January, the rules on the order of business on the Agenda will be suspended and agenda items will be listed as controversial or non-controversial. For those non-controversial items, information will be given to the Council ahead of time. At the meeting, a motion is made, some clarification made if necessary, and voted upon. 3) Council will also try making a motion on an item prior to any detailed discussuion, then have limited discussion pertaining to the motion, and then caltin~tthe question. 4) Council also agreed to look at what items need further Council / ~~ àRB schedule an additional meeting if needed rather than having a pre-determined date for an additional monthly meeting. Council will maintain a list of outstanding items to be discussed at such a meeting. It was also agreed to retain the present Committee groups and to try having one or two meetings with the Council to see if anything can be accomplished. Council discussion was also on rotating the Chairmen on the two Commissions. It was suggested that because the Comprehensive Plan is not yet completed, that Ms. Bosell could be appointed to a second term if she would be willing to serve. Mr. Mand has served for three years as Chairman of the Park Board, and the Mayor will talk with Mr. Mand or see if any other Park Commissioner would be interested in the position. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m. , Respectfully s~ '~~CÀ- i~ Mar lla A. Peach Recordlng Secretary